Net users face web ban for illegal downloads

[spaceelf]

Doesn't really matter. One way or another, there will be an active response to accessing illegal materials. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow...but as soon as there is, a lot of the stuff pirates take for granted will change significantly.

[Kushan]

Doesn't really matter. One way or another, there will be an active response to accessing illegal materials. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow...but as soon as there is, a lot of the stuff pirates take for granted will change significantly.

Unless there's a world-wide reform and every single net-connected country does it, it'll never happen. Look at the pirate bay, originally it was based in sweeden and as soon as it got attacked, it was moved to at least 3 different countries.

[Xenomorph]

Misleading thread title.

There is nothing "web" about this.

It's not about web downloading, or blocking web traffic of any kind.

Why mention "web" ???

People can use the Internet without ever visiting a web site, and people can use web sites all day without ever getting on the Internet.

Internet != Web

[Kushan]

Erm....I think you're arguing semantics here, but isn't "web" in reference to the "web" of computers connected around the globe to form the internet? Net and Web just being two words that describe the same thing?

[+orgitnized Subscriber¹]

I can't help but laugh at the OP's actual name, and then seeing this post in the title :laugh:

Yeah, this stuff is really getting more and more momentum. I'll tell you what - I can't stand having to constantly pay higher cable bills (and the like) only to see that my every move is inevitably going to be watched...or already is. :shiftyninja:

[Astra.Xtreme]

lol. Six million people that access pirated content. I think they are a few zeros short

[Skyfrog]

Thats just ignorant. So tired of you trolls, really Neowin has gone down the tubes, what a shame to.

Jeez, lighten up Francis. I'm pretty sure it was a joke. :rolleyes:

Look up "stupid laws" if you don't believe silly stuff like that is actually on the books.

[Nicholas-c Veteran]

the thing is, in the UK their is alot of people (everyone i know) aged 15 - 20 who download music via limewire etc because they either dont have a job to buy the music and think it is a good way to do it because in the UK it is rarely enforced unlike the US where u will lose your bank account to riaa for doing anything as such

[jerzdawg]

... some US ISPs already do this.... "a friend of mine" ISPs rec'd a letter from Universal Studios with the exact file name, date, time, program used of a certain movie... they played dumb about knowing anything... claimed they might have an unprotected wireless network.... the lady basically said... secure it.. because you are liable for anything downloaded from your IP address, she stated that this is basically a warning, but if they receive any future notices... his service will be terminated that day.... currently in his area there is only one other ISP(verizon 3mb DSL) so.. long story short... he is now pirate free...

[abecedarian paradoxious]

Erm....I think you're arguing semantics here, but isn't "web" in reference to the "web" of computers connected around the globe to form the internet? Net and Web just being two words that describe the same thing?

Why don't you see WSP instead of ISP then?

Internet != web. The web is part of the Internet, not the entire Internet.

The International Network, or more commonly known as the Internet and the World Wide Web are not synonymous. The Internet is a collection of interconnected computer networks, linked by copper wires, fiber-optic cables, wireless connections, etc. In contrast, the Web is a collection of interconnected documents and other resources, linked by hyperlinks and URLs. The World Wide Web is one of the services accessible via the Internet, along with various others including e-mail, file sharing, online gaming and others...

- taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet

Not trying to argue, just pointing out a fact.

*edit- self-censored.....

Edited February 12, 2008 by Regression_88

[benplace]

Well if the data you are downloading is encrypted........??

[popsmear]

Misleading thread title.

There is nothing "web" about this.

It's not about web downloading, or blocking web traffic of any kind.

Why mention "web" ???

People can use the Internet without ever visiting a web site, and people can use web sites all day without ever getting on the Internet.

Internet != Web

Semantics.

[Glorious]

I can see this falling before it gets off the ground, who will pay for all the new equipment ISPs will have to install for monitoring usage?

I doubt the ISPs would happily do that, what about encryption?

It doesn't sound very well thought through at this stage.

[emale_tart]

I can see this falling before it gets off the ground, who will pay for all the new equipment ISPs will have to install for monitoring usage?

I doubt the ISPs would happily do that, what about encryption?

It doesn't sound very well thought through at this stage.

So funny to see the entertainment industries dwindling income being passed on to the consumer, what next a blanket tax/fee on internet usage... get a grip

I'd be happy to go see a movie at the cinema, but ?5.70 to sit for three hours in a grimey, filthy and generally nasty cinema populated by smug-arsed 16yr old dropouts from school - no thanks.

As for music, yep I used to use the usual suspects, Limewire, Morpheus... damn back in the day it was Audiogalaxy Satelite. And yet now I find myself paying for the music I use/listen to. Purely for the niche of dance music i use and find - i have no quims paying $1.49 a track.

I think right now we're at a crossroads, ISP's really just can't cope with the volume of data demanded by UK customers so they look for ways to punt customers out and "traffic management" with the result that the ISP's just don't provide anywhere near the service they did 3-5 years ago.

Most of the anger from this bill will go to the goverment, but alot of the backlash surely has to lie with the ISP's if they accept this voluntary code.

[spaceelf]

Unless there's a world-wide reform and every single net-connected country does it, it'll never happen. Look at the pirate bay, originally it was based in sweeden and as soon as it got attacked, it was moved to at least 3 different countries.

Once ISP monitoring is in place, why would any other country have to do it? Your ISP is only sending you data in one country. And they'd be bound by law to monitor you, assuming you're in the country that passed the law.

[Kushan]

Once ISP monitoring is in place, why would any other country have to do it? Your ISP is only sending you data in one country. And they'd be bound by law to monitor you, assuming you're in the country that passed the law.

Because it's not as easy to monitor what you download as you think, there will always be a program our guide out there to show you how to not get caught and they can't easily get rid of that.

[SakuraKira]

Disclaimer: Non-Brit.

Lol, you'll get "an e-mail warning"? What if you use an e-mail not affiliated with your ISP, like gmail or something? What if someone is using BitTorrent to share open source work, how exactly are the ISPs to know about that, and how would this affect BitTorrent traffic?

Unfortunately, I think the EFF only deals with US legislation. Is there something similar over there?

Misleading thread title.

More like "misleading article title." +zer0day named this thread after the title of the article he linked, which seems to be a typical news poster thing. Sure, the worldwide web exists in/on the internet, but most people will use the terms interchangably. No biggie.

Edited February 12, 2008 by SakuraKira

[Mr Winkle]

this is just another one of the governments badly thought out proposals.

in the end, all that will happen is that encryption, instead of something used only by big businesses and power users will become an everyday thing for everybody wanting to protect their privacy.

i'm sure they'll ban encryption next followed shortly by the internet.

[DodgeViper]

Still no answer if usenet will be safe from moitoring as that's all I use. I some times use my isps news server but most of time I stick to giganews as it's got long retention and there's never really any damaged file.

I hope the ISPs send warning letters instead of emails since I've never used my ISPs email address.

[Peter Lyon]

Email warnings... doesnt that just scream "keep going until you get a warning", that is, if they can send you an email atall.

Rather than carrying out this legislation, they should just cut us off completely. practically EVERYONE under the age of 70 here downloads illegally,

[alsheron]

According to a report I read on the PC Pro website, copyrighted filesharing in the UK is set to become virtually impossible.

The government is set to bring in new laws which will legally force ISP's to crack down and eventually ban filesharing of copyrighted material.

Scary stuff, if only for the implications surrounding the level of control the government now (openly) has over our activities on the internet. Pirates beware

PC Pro article

[Coldgunner]

not really, software devs will always create new ways to hide users activities. Its up to the media companies to embrace the new distribution methods offered and use them without insane restrictions that are currently employed.

[TheElite]

It's currently only a proposal.

[FlibbyFlobby]

It this really about protecting the artists and intellectual property though? I heard on the radio that the estimated losses for the UK record industry is ?1 billion a year. I'm betting the government would love a 17.5% slice of VAT on that.

I'm also interested to know how ISPs are going to catch anything more than people running crap applications like Limewire and Morpheus anyway. Anybody who is technically inclined will be using more secure methods to get their files, and will move from any ISP that threatens to stop them.

Typical government response though, don't target the root cause and make profits in the process, genius. They'll be sticking the BPI losses on fuel duty next too.

[Kushan]

Yeah, even 17.5% of ?1billion wouldn't cover the cost of this. Plus, has anyone considered the folly of charging ISP's with the task of banning their OWN customers? Particularly the ones likely to opt for the faster, more expensive packages. That wont go down well.